W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2013

Re: http methods

From: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2013 01:04:05 -0700
Message-ID: <CABP7RbcdFMJo_RD1A0CFFPbtqXNpqPOkG8H_9J8Xn9ai9+MwGQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: ChanWilliam(陈智昌) <willchan@chromium.org>
Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Not worth even considering or discussing. If you don't think any particular
method is useful, ignore it.
On Aug 13, 2013 12:32 AM, "William Chan (陈智昌)" <willchan@chromium.org>

> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-method-registrations-12seems to have the current method registrations. I'm not a web services guy,
> so my ignorance is expected, but wow, I didn't realize there were so many.
> Can someone explain if all these are truly necessary?
> I'm asking this since a colleague of mine wrote this blog post (
> http://www.onebigfluke.com/2013/08/lets-remove-verbs-from-http-20.html),
> so I decided to look into it a bit. Note that I recognize that HTTP/2.0 is
> not the place to remove methods, but I'm curious if there has been any
> effort to simply HTTP by removing some exotic methods. If so, I think
> that'd be nice.
> I'm not really looking to champion a simplification effort here since I
> have other bike sheds more worthy of my paint, but I just wanted to see if
> it'd be easy to drop some unused methods.
> Cheers.
Received on Tuesday, 13 August 2013 08:04:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:14 UTC